[MLton] self-compiled mlton on redhat 9

[Stephen Weeks]

> Ah yes, you should consider using a regular versioning scheme.
> As it stands now, the package name using offical Fedora rules
> is this: mlton-0.0-0.fdr.1.20030716, and it is quite ugly.

Looking at 
	
	http://fedora.redhat.com/participate/developers-guide/s1-rpm-guidelines.html

I don't see why we can't use mlton-20030716-1.i386.rpm, just as we do
now.  Is there some other spec you're looking at, in particular,
something that rules out 20030716 as a version number?